Duncan
Joined on June 26, 2002
Last Post on May 20, 2010
Recent Posts
Maybe there's an up side...
@ May 20, 2010 9:00 PM in An environmental disaster of epic proportions....
Clamshell hinges on clams harvested from the Gulf won't squeak when you open them.Lemmee borrow that soapbox a minute...
@ February 27, 2007 7:27 PM in Ozone concerns in China & India
"…when her husband suggested eight years ago they get an air conditioner, she objected because it seemed extravagant. He got one, anyway, and now she's hooked on staying cool. All my friends have air conditioners now," she told the newspaper. "Ten years ago, no one did." Sounds like something my folks might have said in the sixties. Ken, what are you listening to besides Rush Limbaugh up there in the hills of New Hampshire? (Or is it Vermont, I forget) I'm starting to think the absolute quiet in the absence of police sirens and the gentle burbling of the pristine Passaic River may be affecting your reasoning. I know for me, it's kind of hard to talk with my tongue in cheek. If THE answer existed, we’d be doing it. It’s true alcohol has about half the calories of gas, but that’s an easy fix, just make bigger gas tanks. Corn isn’t really where it’s at, economically. (Can you spell ConAgra?... sure!). I’ve been hearing figures like a 1 to 3 energy in to energy out for corn, but better numbers for sugar cane like 1 to 7. Hell, Cuba might look sweet after Castro dies. Brazil runs on the “worthless, expensive alternative” ethanol. Ethanol production from other sources using bio-technology (weeds or wood requiring no fertilizers) holds some promise. It’s definitely NOT insanity, unless it raises the price of whiskey. NUKES??? Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that where the French and other politically evolved Euros get most of their electricity??? That alone makes that approach suspect to me. However, I suppose it could be argued it’s so simple to design a nuke, even those who brought us the Peugeot can do it. But even though their supposedly sexy women have spindly legs and an over-rated sense of fashion, the Frenchies do know how to whip up a decent plate of grub. Let’s face it, every form of energy seem to come with costs other than the selling price. Dirty coal has health costs. Nukes have waste problems. Oil means dependence on unstable foreign sources. Bio has less energy density, requires real estate and still pollutes, maybe in some unforeseen ways. All of these sources are “subsidized” by us in some way, either in hidden health costs or war or political wrangling. (Figure the cost of military “insurance” added to the price of oil). We sit on some of the largest coal reserves in the world. Gotta say I agree with you on that one. Let’s spend some money on gasification and other research. Now, before it gets really ugly. We have uranium and it’s scary, but for the most part works well. Unfortunately, there’s the long life waste problem AND the possibility of accidents with catastrophic consequences, hopefully not as crazy as Chernobyl because we design with containment structures. But it seems the design boys need to add in a little common sense with their calculus… I used to live across the Hudson River from Indian Point nuclear plant, and saw a transformer go up in a flash of blue light and sparks during the first New York City blackout. Then there was Three Mile Island. I think having a nuke on a large river thirty miles upstream from New York City, or a nuke on Three Mile Island doesn’t make a lot of sense. If we go nuclear, would you be willing to stash the waste in the geologically stable granite of New Hampshire? I mean, Nevada has already had its share of nuclear waste straight from the bomb, and I don’t think they’re buying it unless it’s rammed down their throats. Short term solution will probably be a costly combination of lower-energy-rich sources. Realistically, when gas gets expensive enough, it’s ethanol for cars in the near future. Probably clean burning coal technology for power plants in the long run, maybe fuel conversion from coal and low-grade oils, biofuels, solar, and wind. But they all cost more for a smaller return, and require time and research for developing infrastructure and making economic sense. Solar and wind alone would seem to have astronomically expensive startup costs. Right here, right now, we run on oil. Easing into other sources slowly has got to be the way to go, we don’t want to kill our economy… That’s why I think the approach of committing to a small percent of renewables for our energy is decent. Ultimately, it's all about renewables. Four billion a week could buy a lot of research, but a mega-buck lives-and-treasure long shot, a high stakes gamble for controlling half the world’s oil is certainly the big jackpot, and that's what the neocons are putting our money on. Also underwritten by Uncle Sam. No matter what we do it’s gonna be somewhat painful. Actually, I think you and I mostly agree except for ethanol. Watch and wait…Cleaning HX tubes
@ May 26, 2006 1:17 PM in problem solved...was groaning copper tube boiler
Kevin, what kind of cleaning tools do you use to rod out Minifin boilers? I've got a few out there that could probably use it at this point. Thanks. DuncanGlycol and low mass copper
@ May 24, 2006 2:59 PM in problem solved...was groaning copper tube boiler
Dave, it's hard to answer your purging questions without knowing the system configuration. But marc sums it all up nicely. I start with the least intrusive way by raising the system pressure and lowering the boiler temperature if that's OK with your heat emitters - maybe not with hydro air. Gotta be OK with your boiler relief valve, too. Also look for ways to increase flow. Speaking in generalities, if I have the opportunity to re-pipe, I try to increase flow through the boiler by using a bypass or a larger circ (within reason). Also, I pump INTO the boiler, but away from the expansion tank. Lots of copper fin tube manufacturers recommend this arrangement, and from experience I can say it avoids problems, assuming your pressure relief valve is sized appropriately. If you have snowmelt and it's not isolated with a heat exchanger, the auto fill is a no-no. I've seen systems freeze from makeup water replacing glycol and raising the freeze point if the system leaks. If it were me, I'd save the glycol and test it to see if it can be re-used.12 vdc timer
@ November 12, 2004 3:43 PM in Help with devising an overide T-stat
Try a net search using "12 volt DC interval timer" or some such. In about ten seconds, I found: http://www.backwoodssolar.com/Catalogpages2/wiring2.htmHow does the boiler handle low flow ?
@ September 3, 2004 1:37 PM in Flow in a Proportional System
Mike, What kind of boiler (gravity conversion?) and how long are the burn times? Sounds like the system I want to put in my place.How does the boiler handle low flow ?
@ September 3, 2004 1:36 PM in Flow in a Proportional System
What Paul asked... What kind of boiler (gravity conversion?) and ballpark, how long are the burn times? Sounds like the system I want to put in my place.How does the boiler handle low flow ?
@ September 3, 2004 1:34 PM in Flow in a Proportional System
What kind of boiler (gravity conversion?) and how long are the burn times? Sounds like the system I want to put in my place.I asked about that lifetime warranty.
@ August 21, 2004 1:56 PM in Nailing the lid on the Suspended Tube Coffin
They told me the only way I could have a lifetime warranty is if they killed me as soon as I walked out the supply house door. So yer sayin' I can git all my money back on that pinholed copper I keep fixin'?Don't you ever be sorry fer bein' honest, sonny!
@ August 21, 2004 3:52 AM in Nailing the lid on the Suspended Tube Coffin
This stuff needs to be talked about. Staple up does suck. Just like hot air systems with collapsed-flex-duct-hung-with-baling-wire sucks. Just like anything that stops heat flow and runs the appliance up to it's limit without dumping much of the heat sucks. It's obvious isn't it? Why should an adequate system be the standard? Why shouldn't a more efficient system be the standard? Yesh, yesh.... I know what yer thinkin'... Yer thinkin' I bin drinkin' in the wee hours of the mornin'. Well, yer right. I'm fulla wild ideas. And I'm truth talkin'. There's nothin' wrong with the truth, is there? Or am I just foolin' myself? *snicker* There ya have it.Right
@ June 12, 2004 2:22 PM in Sympathies to you Americans
I know it wasn't you that called for a hangin' Constantin, sorry if the progression of threads made it seem that way.bipartisanship
@ June 8, 2004 1:31 PM in Sympathies to you Americans
How about that, somebody looking at both sides. ;-) Funny how if you hate someone you can only see the bad in them. And if you love them, they can do no wrong. I disagreed with most (not all) of President Reagan's politics, especially Nicaragua and Iran Contra. But I'm sure he was personally convinced there was a danger there. The Red Menace thing. It just hacked me that so many innocent civilians were indiscriminately killed by the Contras, Somoza's so-called "freedom fighters". The Sandanistas had free elections sooner after thier revolution, than we in the US did after our revolution. They walked their talk and put it out there for popular elections after the revolution (and eventually got voted out). In light of my personal bias, I found it hard to understand the reason for the man's popularity at the time. But I think it's as others pointed out... We were emerging from dismal times of inflation, unemployment, hostage taking and gas shortages, and he inspired a positive outlook about America. He was a charismatic, likeable guy who looked and carried himself well in the role of a president and (I mean that in a positive way). Personally he was charming and funny. Like others said, he was a stateman who used his charm to bridge differences and start dialog. But he could get down to business too when he had to - ask Khadaffi. Politics aside, I probably would've liked the guy. I listen to both left and right wing talk radio, and one of the shows mentioned Jesse Jackson working outside goverment channels, negotiating the return the downed American jet pilots (remember that?). According to this show, President Reagan told his staff that there would absolutely be no negative talk about that event from his staff. Pretty classy. We could use a little more of that these days. Sorry, saying he shoulda been hanged, and pointing out one Democrat jerk's vitriol from a conservative newsletter isn't in that spirit. On a personal level, that picture Mark posted of Nancy Reagan kissing her husband's coffin goodbye is incredibly sad. Fifty years... Reminds me of my grandfather saying goodbye to his wife. One of the most heart-wrenching, touching moments I've ever witnessed in my life.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:44 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. >>>"Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A Professional" and take a chance on a guy who might run his business the way he posts on The Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your 'i's and cross your 't's " metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. Don't you think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal? I also think it's obvious he's a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-) Well... anyway, he's chillin'... he's cool. The thoughtful and insightful answers are pretty impressive, I thought.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:43 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. >>>"Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A Professional" and take a chance on a guy who might run his business the way he posts on The Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your 'i's and cross your 't's " metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. Don't you think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal? I also think it's obvious he's a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-) Well... anyway, he's chillin'... he's cool. The thoughtful and insightful answers are pretty impressive, it appears to me.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:42 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. >>>"Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A Professional" and take a chance on a guy who might run his business the way he posts on The Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your 'i's and cross your 't's " metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. Don't you think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal? I also think it's obvious he's a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-) Well... anyway, he's chillin'... he's cool. Thoughtful and insightful answers, it appears to me.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:41 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. >>>"Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A Professional" and take >>>a chance on a guy who might run his business the way he posts on The >>>Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your 'i's and cross your 't's " metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. Don't you think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal? I also think it's obvious he's a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-) Well... anyway, he's chillin'... he's cool. Thoughtful and insightful answers, it appears to me.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:41 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. >>>"Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A Professional" and take >>>a chance on a guy who might run his business the way he posts on The Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your 'i's and cross your 't's " metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. Don't you think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal? I also think it's obvious he's a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-) Well... anyway, he's chillin'... he's cool. Thoughtful and insightful answers, it appears to me.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:40 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. >>>"Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A >>>Professional" and take a chance on a guy who might run >>>his business the way he posts on The Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your 'i's and cross your 't's " metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. Don't you think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal? I also think it's obvious he's a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-) Well... anyway, he's chillin'... he's cool. Thoughtful and insightful answers, it appears to me.Perceptive...
@ May 5, 2004 12:35 PM in Pardon my French!
Yeah, I think Tom imagines if you spell poorly, you design and install heating systems poorly. "Why would I want to click on a link to "Find A Professional" and take a chance on a guy who might run his business the way he posts on The Wall?" He simply associates poor spelling with poor workmanship. The old "dot your "i"s and cross your "t"s metaphor. A flawed assumption, but probably a valid perception. I think it's fair to say a polished presentation usually makes a more favorable impression, everything else being equal. I think it's clear that he's obviously a gentleman with sincere concerns, not a troll. After all, he reappeared and explained himself even though he didn't have to. He's alright. Or is that allright? ;-)Big dogs aren't always mean.
@ April 17, 2004 4:54 PM in An idea
Hi Bill. "However, if there are no ferrous components in the system, the Wirsbo AQUAPEX non-barrier tubing may be used. AQUAPEX is the same quality tubing, but because it has no barrier, it costs less." I don't think it's too big a dog, it's simply a true statement. Kinda hard to argue that the truth isn't true. I have no reason to think Wirsbo produces anything but quality. Years ago, I priced a couple systems using non-barrier vs. barrier, and just didn't see an economic advantage. For a 3,000 square foot home it was maybe a couple hundred bucks difference at most. When I added up the cost of bronze circ, heat exchanger, Spirovent, it was darn near even. The only reasonably priced non-ferrous boilers I found back then were copper-fin-tubed with glass-lined iron wet wall headers. Designed for batch water heating or swimming pool heating - not a good match for what I needed. Anyway, on the first circulator failure, any money saved on the non O2 tubing would be spent on the added bronze or SS cost of the replacement circ. The other option is to pay a little more for O2 barrier tubing up front (at the same time less on cast iron components). Then when the first circulator replacement comes along, you pay less for a cast iron circ. But maybe tubing prices have changed since I last compared. There are certainly more non-ferrous boilers to choose from these days. I was unable to tell from Brian's post whether he saves $190.00 or $960.00 by using non-barrier. ? Sad to hear you got trashed for advocating or just mentioning using non-O2 barrier tubing for heating (didn't see that thread). I think if you read these posts again, it appears to me that arguments against using it have less to do with the tubing itself, but more to do with what is (or may be in the future) attached to the tubing. I don't have a problem with it, I just never had a reason to go that way. The true fact of the matter is, low temperature systems (100°F range) don't usually have problems with oxygen. I've got a 12 year old system with polybutylene tubing and all the original cast iron components. That's my own home. The other side of the coin is, that after you see hundreds of systems, most of them repairs, you start to get an idea of how robust and bulletproof you need to design a new system. For a few twenty dollar bills extra, I'll always err on the side of a more conservative, cautious design, in this case barrier tubing. A little more fudge factor. And when I say that, I'm not implying using non O2 tubing is risky or edgy design. Just tighter design parameters, more specifically for all the other components. Speaking of which, it sounds like you've checked out potable expansion tanks more than I ever have.@ April 17, 2004 4:36 PM in An idea
Hi Bill. "However, if there are no ferrous components in the system, the Wirsbo AQUAPEX non-barrier tubing may be used. AQUAPEX is the same quality tubing, but because it has no barrier, it costs less." I don't think it's too big a dog, it's simply a true statement. Kinda hard to argue that the truth isn't true. I have no reason to think Wirsbo produces anything but quality. Years ago, I priced a couple systems using non-barrier, and just didn't see an economic advantage. For a 3,000 square foot home it was a couple hundred bucks difference. When I added up the cost of bronze circs, heat exchanger, it was darn near even. The only non-ferrous boilers I found back then were copper-fin-tubed with glass-lined wet wall headers. Designed for batch water heating or swimming pool heating - not a good match for what I needed. So on the first circulator failure, the money saved on the non O2 tubing was spent on the added bronze or SS cost of the replacement circ. The other option is to pay a little more for O2 barrier tubing up front (at the same time less on cast iron componrents), and when the first circulator replacement comes along, you pay less for a cast iron circ. But maybe tubing prices have changed since I last compared. There are certainly more non-ferrous boilers to choose from these days. I was unable to tell from Brian's post whether he saves $190.00 or $960.00 by using non-barrier. Sad to hear you got trashed for advocating or just mentioning non-O2 barrier tubing for heating. I think if you read the posts again, it appears to me that arguments against using it have less to do with the tubing itself, but more to do with what is (or may be in the future) attached to the tubing. I don't have a problem with it, I just never had a reason to go that way. The true fact of the matter is, low temperature systems (100°F range) don't usually have problems with oxygen. I've got a 12 year old system with polybutylene tubing and all the original cast iron components. That's my own home. The other side of the coin is, that after you see hundreds of systems, most of them repairs, you start to get an idea of how robust and bulletproof you need to design a new system. For a few twenty dollar bills extra, I'll always err on the side of a more conservative, cautious design, in this case barrier tubing. A little more fudge factor. And when I say that, I'm not implying using non O2 tubing is risky or edgy design. Just tighter design parameters, more specifically for all the other components. Speaking of which, it sounds like you've checked out potable expansion tanks more than I ever have.Reasons vs. rationalizations
@ April 16, 2004 2:26 PM in An idea
IT'S THE WAY I'VE ALWAYS DONE IT, THEREFORE IT'S THE ONLY RIGHT WAY TO DO IT Actually, it turns out that IS the way I've always done it. But not because it's the ONLY RIGHT WAY to do it. For me, it was because the economic advantage was never significant enough to go non-barrier. One job with a lot of tubing (and therefor a larger tubing-cost saving) came close, but no cigar. That is, for a few bucks more, the homeowner has the cheap insurance and versatility of a truly closed system. I don't ever have to worry about any kind of oxygen problem ever. [OK, there's one exception: a slow leak with constant fresh oxygenated make-up water but usually the owner calls when the floor gets wet.] I wouldn't necessarily interpret the reasons given by the experienced and knowledgeable pros who responded here as arbitrary, habitual, capricious or turf protecting (What turf?). They would just as soon use a blue boiler as a red boiler if it fit the application better. The guys that responded know what they're talking about. They are not saying non-barrier is wrong, or bad or inferior - just that they have their reasons to go closed system. Reasons that outweigh -in their opinion- going with a non-barrier system. Just like there are reasons to go with non-barrier in some cases. Like Mark, I've worked on both kinds of systems. Some had problems, some didn't. Properly designed non-barrier systems should last indefinitely. I think what Mark is describing above may be some kind of dissimilar metals and electrolysis issue the designer couldn't forsee. The problem non-barrier systems I've commonly seen are typically cast iron with polybutylene run at higher stapleup systems - poor design. In the end, given the kind of neglect many heating systems end up seeing, I think making systems as bullet-proof and easily servicable as is economically possible is a desireable design approach. Especially when you look at things over the long haul. These guys have designed, played with, tweaked, installed, observed, repaired and seen a lot of systems, and that counts for something. They're too sharop to get comfortable with the "That's the way I've always done it" design philosophy. Most here, and hot rod especially, likes to tinker and play. The expansion tank you're looking for exists. It's an expansion tank designed for potable water systems. If you pipe it below, and a short distance away from, the hot water there shouldn't be a temperature issue.
